OT: NBA Sacramento sale moves along

1. Isn't Burkle a reputable owner in our league?
2. If this simply echoes Sonicsgate in terms of fan alienation, then moving the Kings to Seattle is essentially moving the black eye in the other direction. Better to wait (Grizzlies, Pelicans, Bobcats, etc) instead of shift Sacramento to the role of "market to which we need to return one day."
3. Sacramento will become the top market nationally with no major pro sports. That spot could be filled before the NBA gets back at all.

The shuffle already makes Stern and the league look bush, but repeating mistakes would only compound the joke.

We're talking the Penguins Burkle right? Why not just move the NBA team to Pittsburgh? Fairly new arena, had a team back in the day, larger market than Sacramento pending which DMA you take and if it's Milwaukee you don't even need to realign.

The arena deal is already done essentially. It's putting together ownership commitments to match enough of the deal to keep them in Sacramento that's the concern. This came out of the blue which was likely the purpose for the Maloofs to keep some ownership of the team and get out of town.

I recall they had the structure set up but didn't close. How much would the owners contribute?

The arena deal is already done essentially. It's putting together ownership commitments to match enough of the deal to keep them in Sacramento that's the concern. This came out of the blue which was likely the purpose for the Maloofs to keep some ownership of the team and get out of town.

I recall they had the structure set up but didn't close. How much would the owners contribute?

They came to a non-binding agreement between the city, the Maloofs, and AEG. Both the city and AEG has said that they are still behind the deal if the situation arises where new owners come in and get the Kings and want that deal. The deal only had the Kings contributing somewhere between 65-75 million and that was mostly going to come from the loan that the Maloofs owed the city anyway.

It's fairly gravy train for any owner that doesn't have money issues like the Maloofs have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstommylee

There is no finalized Sacramento arena deal.

Hence why I said essentially.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstommylee

There were a lot of other issues before it ever gotten to the point of it being finalized.

No there wasn't. The deal was ready to go and was in the preliminary stages of getting off the ground when the Maloofs backed out citing that it didn't make sense for them financially. A good look at the deal actually shows that the Kings get a damn good amount of revenue relative to what they have to put in to get the new building.

They came to a non-binding agreement between the city, the Maloofs, and AEG. Both the city and AEG has said that they are still behind the deal if the situation arises where new owners come in and get the Kings and want that deal. The deal only had the Kings contributing somewhere between 65-75 million and that was mostly going to come from the loan that the Maloofs owed the city anyway.

It's fairly gravy train for any owner that doesn't have money issues like the Maloofs have.

Hence why I said essentially.

No there wasn't. The deal was ready to go and was in the preliminary stages of getting off the ground when the Maloofs backed out citing that it didn't make sense for them financially. A good look at the deal actually shows that the Kings get a damn good amount of revenue relative to what they have to put in to get the new building.

Who's covering Cost over runs is a big issue, then the actually selling of parking garages to private group and the loss of revenue from that. It takes longer than 2-3 months to get an arena deal done.

The arena deal is already done essentially. It's putting together ownership commitments to match enough of the deal to keep them in Sacramento that's the concern. This came out of the blue which was likely the purpose for the Maloofs to keep some ownership of the team and get out of town.

AEG, in essence blocked the transfer to Anaheim, Pink Floyd, that's why the Anaheim deal collapsed because it infringes on the LA Market...

Who's covering Cost over runs is a big issue, then the actually selling of parking garages to private group and the loss of revenue from that. It takes longer than 2-3 months to get an arena deal done.

Who was covering the overrun costs is irrelevant to the Maloofs because they weren't going to and it was never in the deal that they would. That was going to be the city's responsibility one way or the other. The deal didn't come together in just two to three months. The city had been working for about a year or so on a deal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH

AEG, in essence blocked the transfer to Anaheim, Pink Floyd, that's why the Anaheim deal collapsed because it infringes on the LA Market...

Got a source for that? It wasn't AEG that blocked that deal. Nobody really blocked the deal.

Who was covering the overrun costs is irrelevant to the Maloofs because they weren't going to and it was never in the deal that they would. That was going to be the city's responsibility one way or the other. The deal didn't come together in just two to three months. The city had been working for about a year or so on a deal.

And they have no shovel to group arena deal with funding finalized so its a moot point.

They came to a non-binding agreement between the city, the Maloofs, and AEG. Both the city and AEG has said that they are still behind the deal if the situation arises where new owners come in and get the Kings and want that deal. The deal only had the Kings contributing somewhere between 65-75 million and that was mostly going to come from the loan that the Maloofs owed the city anyway.

But its not like the city has $300+ million sitting in an account waiting. So they have to go to market and get a commitment from a funding source to do it.

I want Seattle to return to the NBA, and after they got screwed, the NBA owes them. However, I have grown fond of my adopted city's team, and want Seattle to gain their re-birth by other means.

I've followed this story fairly closely, and here's my take. While Hansen has made a deal with the Maloofs, its by no means final or a death sentence for Sacramento. The board of governors will only vote on the deal if it gets past the review committee. This is where KJ and the potential buyers will stage their fight, and where the Anaheim deal died. A clause has been exposed in which minority owners are able to veto any such sale if they can meet the offered price. Burkle and Mastrov are actively working with several of these owners, and can claim they have first rights to buy out the Maloofs, and have the cash to do it. It's not clear, but it may be that they only have to match the initial offer, which would take The bottomless pockets of Seattle out of the equation. However, Ellison may have been brought in to counter the Seattle $$$ if it becomes a bidding war.

KJ and Sacramento also will have a lot of ammunition in their corner while arguing their side's case. The actions of the Maloofs during the arena deal, and years of neglect leading up, can lead the NBA to act in favor of Sacramento under the "best interest of the league" clause. KJ having arena deals and deep-poket owners helps the city prove its a viable option for the NBA, and were not given a fair chance under the leadership of the Maloofs. Also, Sacramento having no NFL, MLB, NHL, MLS or major D1 college team to compete with, only helps the NBA. It would be in the NBA's best interest to retain Sacramento if there are pieces in place to make the team work.

The NBA isn't going to say no if Hansen offers more money, and Hansen's not going to be outbid. There's no way this gets to this point and all falls apart in front of the BOG

BOG says no to seattle the NBA would give themselves a black eye and a huge PR nightmare AGAIN almost to the point of there has to be expansion. Stern doesn't want to head his reign as NBA commissioner as the person that shafted seattle twice. Local group can offer more money but Maloofs don't have to sell it locally. So how bad does the NBA want the maloofs out? Voting no on seattle then Maloofs decided to keep the team and not selling it locally will not be helpful for the NBA.

BOG says no to seattle the NBA would give themselves a black eye and a huge PR nightmare AGAIN almost to the point of there has to be expansion. Stern doesn't want to head his reign as NBA commissioner as the person that shafted seattle twice. Local group can offer more money but Maloofs don't have to sell it locally. So how bad does the NBA want the maloofs out? Voting no on seattle then Maloofs decided to keep the team and not selling it locally will not be helpful for the NBA.

If they sell to Seattle they're trading one blacks eye for another. Expansion is the only way Stern and the NBA come out smelling like roses. Plus, Stern has put years of work into keeping the Kings in Sacramento. Now that there's a serious group, and real arena plan in place, he'd look foolish turning his back at this time.

The owners want to protect their right to sell to the highest bidder, they will not accept any backdoor shenanigans aimed at taking money from the Maloofs.

Except a sale to Sacramento's local owners won't take any money from the Maloofs. A good chunk of what Hansen's offering is going to the Maloofs AND the NBA. Sacramento's offer doesn't have to have money go to the NBA. Besides that, there's a clause in the minority ownership's contracts that allows for a right to match.